Democratic Candidate for Congressional District 1 Amish Shah was revealed to have attacked former President Ronald Reagan and the entire system of capitalism in a recently uncovered video from 2018.
In the video footage, Shah is heard to say, “What we’ve got is an economic system here that isn’t fair. People have started to realize this finally after years. What happened with Ronald Reagan starting to cut taxes on the very, very wealthy has now given us the society we have, and this is what the real travesty is.”
In full, Shah offered a distinctly socialist rebuke of Reagan-era conservative reforms, tax cuts that objectively revived the U.S. economy after the disastrous Carter Administration.
“We’re institutionalizing inequality this… this is what we’re doing. Um, what… what we’ve got is an economic system here that isn’t fair,” Shah said.
He then began to outline a socialist solution:
“And, and, and this is what the real travesty is: lack of good healthcare for example. Um… an expensive healthcare strips people of assets. Not having affordable education then takes those people and puts them at, those kids, and puts them at a massive disadvantage. And there you go.
What you’re going to get is people without opportunity and then finding themselves in a place where they can’t make ends meet. And we’re funding a school to prison pipeline and …and that’s, that’s not right. That’s, that’s just morally, uh, objectionable way for a society to run.
And so I’m… I’m happy that what we’re seeing within the democratic party is a… a huge progressive movement that’s coming up and saying this is wrong and we’re going to do something about it.”
Shah’s views do not appear to have changed. In a recent debate featuring Shah, he explained his class warfare argument and even vowed to raise taxes on Arizonans. “I’m not in favor of extending the Trump tax cuts because a lot of the folks that were helped by those were wealthy,” said Shah.
NRCC Spokesperson Ben Petersen criticized Shah heavily in a statement, “Amish Shah’s extreme vow to axe the Trump tax cuts represents a declaration of war on Arizonans’ livelihoods. Shah’s class warfare campaign and support for socialism are disqualifying in the first district.”
As previously reported by the New York Post, Shah’s heavily radicalized socialist background has caused significant controversy in recent weeks as ties to Senator Bernie Sanders found him endorsing single-payer socialized medicine.
He recently ran afoul of the City of Tempe for use of mailers depicting a retired Tempe Police officer in full uniform in violation of A.R.S. 9-500.14, which forbids the use of city resources to influence an election.
And further reporting from the Washington Free Beacon also uncovered his rental of a modest condominium in his district and listing of that address for voter registration purposes, instead of his primary residence located in the neighboring third district, in possible violation of Arizona law.
Former Arizona Governor Doug Ducey announced his opposition to Proposition 140 in a press release from the ‘No on Prop 140’ Committee last week. Prop 140 would convert the Arizona elections system into what has been referred to as “a California-style election scheme built around ranked-choice voting and jungle primaries.”
“Prop 140 would hand the keys to our elections over to a future Legislature, and potentially give a blank check to one partisan politician — the Secretary of State — to determine on his or her own which candidates advance to the general election,” Ducey said.
“Like many Arizonans, I am open to reforms, but this is a recipe for disaster and unintended consequences. We can do better. Join a bipartisan coalition of Arizonans in voting No on Prop 140.”
“We are grateful for Governor Ducey’s staunch opposition to Proposition 140,” said Pinal County Sheriff Mark Lamb and former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould, co-chairs of the No on Prop 140 Committee. “Governor Ducey, like many Arizonans of varying political persuasions, realizes the irreversible harms this ballot measure would inflict on our state. We must not allow Arizona to fall prey to this dangerous election scheme. Vote NO on Prop 140!”
As previously reported by AZ Free News, the efforts to impose this new system of voting on Arizona is being bankrolled by a group known as ‘Unite America’ (formerly known as the Centrist Project) which gave over $1.7 million to boost the Make Elections Fair PAC earlier in October.
This group, headed by Kent Thiry, a wealthy political figure who has spearheaded progressive political causes in Colorado, has and is still pushing similar reforms in states such as Alaska, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
They don’t want you to read the fine print!‼️
Prop 140 gives 1 partisan politician the power to decide who appears on the ballot-even in their own race! This California-style election scheme is designed to benefit the wealthy special interests behind it.
The committee explained that Prop 140 would add 15 new amendments to the Arizona Constitution. It would:
Allow one partisan politician, the Arizona Secretary of State, to decide how many candidates qualify for the general election ballot for every single contest, including his or her own race.
Result in some races where candidates from only one political party appear on the general election ballot.
Force voters to navigate two completely different voting systems on the same ballot, with some races requiring voters to rank candidates under a rank choice voting system and others that do not.
Increase tabulation errors, create longer lines at the polls, and significantly delay election results.
Ducey, returning to political news after an extremely public and acrimonious split with Trump-supporting Republicans, endorsed both President Donald Trump and AZGOP Senate candidate Kari Lake for the 2024 election in August. “Much is on the line this election year & I’m encouraging all eligible Arizonans to vote & prioritize the issues that most affect our state & nation. I will be voting for Republicans up & down the ballot in November — and both Donald Trump and Kari Lake have my endorsement,” he wrote in a social media post.
Ducey explained:
“The border must be secured.
Inflation must be tamed.
America must be respected around the globe and World War III must be avoided.
The Supreme Court should not be restructured by Chuck Schumer.
The TCJA [Tax Cuts and Jobs Act] must be extended and made permanent.
School choice must be supported.
Differences aside, there is too much on the line and only a Republican in the White House and a majority in the House and US Senate can ensure it.”
In partnership with the Republican National Committee (RNC), Republican Congressional candidate for Arizona’s 8th District Abe Hamadeh has issued a letter to Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer. In the letter, Hamadeh and the RNC called for an emergency meeting with the county election officials to review what they described as a “flawed Election Plan.”
In a post to X sharing the letter, Hamadeh wrote that the plan, “fails to account the time voters need to complete the FOUR-PAGE ballot, setting the stage for long lines & chaos on Election Day. I won’t tolerate an election system that disenfranchises the will of the people.”
🚨🚨BREAKING🚨🚨
Today, I partnered with the Republican National Committee (@GOP) to call for an emergency meeting with Maricopa County to immediately review their flawed Election Plan. It fails to account the time voters need to complete the FOUR-PAGE ballot, setting the stage… pic.twitter.com/GWjXE9zA1I
In the three-page letter from Hamadeh and RNC attorney Harmeet Dhillon, they wrote, “We have received information indicating that voters will take significantly longer to complete their ballots than the estimates upon which the Maricopa County Election Plan is based, specifically the provisions related to Election Day voting. Our observations in the field confirm this concern.”
The letter explains, “The county’s current plan, which already expects long lines on Election Day, is based on the unlikely expectation that voters will only take up to a maximum of approximately 12 minutes to complete their ballots. Our information is that voters will take, and are now taking substantially longer to complete their ballots—averaging at least 15 minutes with a maximum that his much higher.”
Dhillon and Hamadeh further pointed out that there has been a significant decrease in the number of voting centers near Paradise Valley Community College, noting that the area has one of the highest turnout rates in the county.
They added, “This will mean dramatically longer lines than expected on election night. As you know, many voters will not be able to endure an hours-long wait to vote, effectively disenfranchising them if the lines grow too long.”
As previously reported by AZ Free News, there has been a serious decrease in the amount of polling centers made available to the county election officials due to limitations in security features and concerns over potential violence and damage in the 2024 election. In the area served by one Phoenix area school district, the number of polling stations has dropped from 17 to one, housed in a secured District office replete with barbed-wire fencing, security gates, and badge-only access, “one step below Fort Knox.”
According to a study from the America First Policy Institute, an analysis of precinct-level data in six Arizona counties from the 2022 election in Arizona revealed “some precincts where there were more ballots being counted than there were registered voters listed as casting ballots and some precincts where the reverse occurred,” as printing errors and long-lines plagued polling centers throughout the state. The total number of discrepancies was well over 8,000 ballots. And as the AFPI notes, the race for Attorney General, in which Hamadeh was defeated, was decided by a razor-thin margin of 280 votes.
The 2022 issue and potential 2024 problems could be quite similar as Yavapai County’s Registrar of Voters Office explained to the Institute’s researchers:
“If a voter checks in on Election Day but walks out with their ballot (does not put it in the ballot box), they will be listed as voted because they signed the register but there will not be a ballot to tabulate.”
Charges against Rebekah Massie, the Surprise mother who was arrested while exercising her First Amendment rights at a city council meeting, were tossed out by North Valley Justice Court Judge Gerald Williams last week. As previously reported by AZ Free News, Massie was to be tried for trespassing after she criticized the Surprise City Attorney during a city council meeting. Judge Williams agreed when defense counsel moved that the trespassing charges against Massie be dismissed with prejudice, meaning they cannot be refiled, and called the charges “objectively outrageous.”
Massie’s attorney Bret Royle, explained, “Rebekah should never have been detained, let alone criminally charged, for speaking her mind. That’s the kind of thing that happens in tyrannical countries, but should never happen here. No American should face jail time for exercising their freedom of speech, and we’re relieved the court agreed.”
Just one day after hearing from attorneys representing Massie and the city, Judge Williams released a scorching three-page ruling, pointedly noting that the city has since rescinded the policy Massie was arrested under, which prohibited the public from criticizing city officials during council meetings.
He wrote in part, “No branch of any federal, state, or local government in this country should ever attempt to control the content of political speech.” He added, “In this case, the government did so in a manner that was objectively outrageous.”
“The Defendant should not have faced criminal prosecution once for expressing her political views,” Williams added. “The Court agrees that she should never face criminal prosecution, for expressing her political views on that date at that time, again.”
JUSTICE: A judge just THREW OUT the criminal charge against an Arizona mom who was arrested and frog-marched out of a city council meeting for criticizing a city attorney’s pay.
The judge slammed the government’s suppression of her free speech as “objectively outrageous.” pic.twitter.com/G9eAgXaRMt
In the unusual case, Surprise city prosecutors recused themselves, citing a conflict of interest, and Massie’s charges were handled by the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office. The Phoenix Prosecutors argued that the case should be dismissed without prejudice allowing the city to potentially re-file charges.
In court documents, Royle argued that the charges against Massie should be dismissed with prejudice based on a lack of evidence to support Massie’s arrest to begin with.
“Ms. Massie was not ‘remaining unlawfully’ as she was within her rights to remain in the chamber despite being asked to leave by Mayor Hall and Officer Shernicoff,” Royle told the court. In his ruling, Williams concurred, observing that Massie’s arrest, originating as it did from city council policy, regulated political speech and “would trigger scrutiny,” under constitutional legal analysis.
A lawsuit against the city by Massie, represented by FIRE is ongoing. In a press release from the FIRE, Massie said, “For more than two months I’ve been living with the threat of punishment and jail time — being taken away from my kids, even — for doing nothing more than criticizing the government. Free speech still matters in America, and I can’t tell you what a relief it is to have people on my side standing up for our rights with me.”
FIRE attorney Conor Fitzpatrick said in a statement, “This is an incredible win for Rebekah and an important message to government bureaucrats around the country that the First Amendment bows to no one. The fight goes on in Rebekah’s lawsuit against the City of Surprise, Mayor Hall, and Officer Schernicoff. We want to make it crystal clear to governments across the United States that brazenly censoring people and betraying the First Amendment comes with a cost.”
As recently reported by AZ Free News, KFYI’s James T. Harris released internal video he obtained of Surprise Police Chief Benny Piña seeming to defend Massie’s arrest, telling officers, “What happened last week in a council meeting resulted in what I think everybody in the world is calling an illegal arrest and a violation of someone’s First Amendment rights. That’s clearly not what we’re about, and that’s not what happened.”
In a statement emailed to AZ Free News after Judge William’s ruling, FIRE attorney Adam Steinbaugh said, “The police chief says their conduct exemplifies the ‘mission’ and ‘philosophy’ of the Surprise Police Department. A judge said their conduct was ‘objectively outrageous.’ We agree with the judge, and the Surprise Police Department should do some soul-searching.”
Arizona Supreme Court Justice Clint Bolick responded to a formal complaint against him to the Commission on Judicial Conduct from Save Our Schools Arizona (SOSAZ) regarding comments he’s made while campaigning for retention in the 2024 Election. Justice Bolick summarized his response in three words before addressing it more fully: “Bring it on.”
In a press release, SOSAZ claimed that Justice Bolick’s comments at a campaign event covered by Politico violate “several provisions of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct.” The group suggested that his speech at a Pentecostal Church in Sun City stating he would continue “fighting for conservative principles,” while standing near a cardboard cutout of President Donald Trump, breached public confidence in his “independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.”
The activist group wrote, “SOSAZ’s written complaint asserts that Justice Bolick’s active campaigning at a Republican Party event violates several provisions of the Arizona Code of Judicial Conduct, which states that judges ‘should aspire at all times to conduct that ensures the greatest possible public confidence in their independence, impartiality, integrity, and competence.’ Justice Bolick’s appearance and comments at this Republican Party meeting certainly do not meet this standard, and we should expect better of our judges, especially those sitting on the state’s highest court.”
Speaking with KJZZ, SOSAZ Executive Director Beth Lewis told the outlet, “It’s not impartial and judges really do need to act with impartiality at all times.”
“Bolick has politicized the courts. It’s also been shown in his decisions, which are directly related to our work at Save Our Schools Arizona,” Lewis claimed. “His ideologically-based decisions have directly impacted our ability to fund our schools for many years.”
I honestly cannot describe the feeling of voting “NO” on Judge Clint Bolick tonight. Bolick has repeatedly politicized the Court and devastated public education.
😡As part of Ducey’s packed Court, he overturned #Prop208, which would have sent $800M per year to AZ classrooms 🧵 pic.twitter.com/ENg1AuCdMC
SOSAZ is running an extensive “do not retain” campaign against retaining Justice Bolick and fellow Justice Kathryn King. Bolick and King are the only two Supreme Court Justices facing retention votes this year. According to the Arizona Commission on Judicial Performance Review, both Bolick and King received extremely high marks to meet the standards on the merits of their decisions.
In an email statement obtained by AZ Free News, Bolick responded to SOSAZ’s complaint:
“A political organization that is opposed to my retention as an Arizona Supreme Court justice has reportedly filed a judicial ethics complaint against me. My response: Bring it on.
I have spent much of my career as a lawyer and judge defending and protecting free-speech rights. I am glad to have the chance to stand up for my own and other judges’ free-speech rights.
Judges necessarily enjoy fewer free-speech rights than others. But we have the right to forcefully defend ourselves against an unprecedented campaign to replace judges solely for political reasons.
In doing so, I adhere meticulously to judicial ethics rules. Judges cannot endorse candidates for office, and I do not (not even my wife). Judges cannot ask for money to support their campaigns, and I do not. Judges may not talk about pending cases or issues that may come before the Court, and I do not. In short, we are forced to ‘campaign’ with one arm tied behind our backs. Our opponents have no such restraints.
The rules do allow us to speak at partisan events, although we cannot serve as party officers and cannot endorse candidates. That is no problem for me, as I have been a registered independent for more than two decades and am the only independent to ever serve on the Court. Since the campaign to remove Justice Kathryn King and me from the Court, I have spoken at both partisan and nonpartisan events.
During the retention campaign, I feel like I spend half my time defending against liberal critics over judicial opinions they do not like, and the other half against conservative critics of opinions they do not like. My colleagues and I were ‘censured’ by the Maricopa County Republican Party executive committee for voting against their wishes in election cases. As a judge committed to the rule of law, I see criticisms from both sides as a badge of honor.
The group’s news release makes clear this is about politics, not judicial ethics. Its executive director, Beth Lewis, tweeted that her vote against me was ‘personal,’ ‘gleeful anger,’ and ‘revenge.’ Filing a judicial ethics complaint for ‘revenge’ is an abuse of process.
But I hope they will pursue it even after the election because we need a clear precedent protecting the free-speech rights of judges to defend themselves, and I will be proud to have my name in the caption.
-Clint Bolick
One minor factual correction in the complaint: I was the last justice appointed to a five-member Court, which later was expanded to seven.”
